bpf: Add "_if" tap APIs
ClosedPublic
Actions

Authored by jhibbits on Jan 17 2023, 4:18 PM.

Details

Reviewers

glebius

Group Reviewers

network

Commits

rG950cc1f44fbd: bpf: Add "_if" tap APIs

Summary

Hide more netstack by making the BPF_TAP macros real functions in the
netstack. "struct ifnet" is used in the header instead of "if_t" to
keep header pollution down.

Diff Detail

Repository

rG FreeBSD src repository

Lint

Lint Not Applicable

Unit

Tests Not Applicable

Event Timeline

jhibbits created this revision.Jan 17 2023, 4:18 PM

Herald added subscribers: melifaro, ae, imp. · View Herald TranscriptJan 17 2023, 4:18 PM

jhibbits requested review of this revision.Jan 17 2023, 4:18 PM

Harbormaster completed remote builds in B49148: Diff 115238.Jan 17 2023, 4:18 PM

Do we really need the "_if" suffix for the new functions? Why don't name them the same way the old macros are named, just lowercase them?

In D38103#867115, @glebius wrote:

Do we really need the "_if" suffix for the new functions? Why don't name them the same way the old macros are named, just lowercase them?

That would work for the ETHER_BPF_MTAP() analogue, but not the BPF_TAP(), BPF_MTAP() and BPF_MTAP2() macros, those lowercase names are already KPIs that take a BPF pointer. I named ether_bpf_mtap_if() as I did to keep parity with the bpf_tap/mtap_if() names. I considered just co-opting the bpf_tap(), etc names instead, but figured they're KPIs that are probably used by others and didn't want to step on toes there.